I’m not sure what you mean by the “circle of blame” but I disagree with the second statement. I think Capers, Thompson, and McCarthy share the blame (and to a lesser extent the personnel staff and assistant coaches) for the past subpar play of the D. But we as outsiders just can’t be sure how much blame to attribute to each. For example, if Capers has been loudly complaining about the lack of talent at safety and ILB for the past few seasons behind closed doors, he would be much less to blame than if he had told Thompson and McCarthy MD Jennings or McMillian would be OK starting at safety. From what we’ve read as fans, it looks like Capers has been a big supporter of Hawk. Is that true? Did reporters get the story straight? In spite of what he was saying in public, was Capers pushing behind the scenes for Hawk’s big contract a few seasons ago by telling Thompson is was ‘indispensable’, or did he just tell Thompson Hawk was “OK”?
Having said that and beyond personnel matters, we’ve seen Capers’ inability or unwillingness to adjust in-game. Sometimes for significant parts of games. I don't think that can fairly be attributed to anyone else. And if Capers was doing a great job, why did McCarthy have to intervene as significantly as he did before this season and again at the bye week? Also there’s evidence that Capers has turned Ds around at previous teams and then those Ds regress leading to his exit.
Finally IMO Shawn Slocum has been worthy of being replaced. If I remember correctly, a good STs coach or two were available last off season or the one before that and there was no attempt by McCarthy to upgrade that position. Slocum has had to deal with injuries affecting who he can play on STs but is there evidence he's an above average STs coach?
To expand on those points, there are three particular issues I'd lay at the feet of Capers regardless of his involvement in personnel decisions.
1) His benchmark stat, as has been quoted at least once per year over the last several seasons, is the spread between the Packers' offensive passer rating and his defenses' passer-rating-against. Given the offensive number Rodgers consistently provides on one side of the equation, Capers has chosen a low bar to hurdle, which is disappointing to start with. As a predictor of winning, it smacks of being a convenient bit of data mining.
By Capers measure, the 2011 defense was very good, with a 10th. ranked 80.6 passer rating against. Unfortunately, that passer rating was padded with the 31 interceptions. Here are less favorable stats:
- dead last in the league in pass yards surrendered with 4,796 yards; that was an NFL record at the time and might still be
- dead last in the league in +20 yard pass plays
- 27th in sacks with 29
- 27th in TDs surrendered with 29
- 26th in 3rd. down conversions against at 42.6%
If that's not bad enough, the Packers were defending teams regularly playing from behind, thereby being forced to throw the ball. A team should defend a lot better than that dismal performance when it knows what's coming!
It was an undisciplined, poor tackling, route jumping, ball-hawking defense which was at high risk of failure on a day when the opposing QB was not throwing them the ball.
2) As for the "is it the coaching or the talent?" question, the history and circumstances of up-and-down tackling is one key aspect that points to the coaching. It seems to have become an annual ritual in recent years where the defense goes through a multi-game stretch of poor tackling, McCarthy's patience wears thin, he makes public statements about it being a key failure, and a pickup in the motors, the second efforts and the pursuit soon follows.
That's clearly not a talent issue. The head coach should not have nag the guys in the press to execute the basics of the job. The DC should have that covered, and get it covered before it starts looking like a habit.
3) Then there's the complexity issue. As I pointed out in the preseason, the "less scheme" proclamation was widely misinterpreted. It became quickly evident that it was going to be a "more scheme, less filling" approach, i.e., yet more permutations of the defense but less per player (for some players, that is) via situational rotations. I think we've seen every possible defensive alignment and call known to the modern game this season short of a rush 8 jailbreak.
This approach is at odds with the constant refreshing of the roster with young players. There's a point at which a unit gets over-guru-ed with the young players getting taken down the rabbit hole. Then it takes 3 years to figure out if they can be decent NFL players!
As far as Capers involvement in personnel decisions, I'd point to his proclamation in the 2013 offseason that the defense needed more length followed by the Datone Jones pick, and his proclamation in the 2014 offseason that a defense needs to be built around at least 3 playmakers, followed by the Peppers signing (a two-fer with length and play making). I don't believe Thompson and the scouting staff are working in a vacuum.
A final point...if it was McCarthy who initiated moving Matthews to the middle in nickel in an effort to back up his promise that the defense would be better in CAPITAL LETTERS, then that should be the final straw.
